Compare Documents

The English files which came to hand yesterday give further particulars of the trial of John Sholto Douglas, Marquis of Queensberry, for alleged libel upon Mr. Oscar Fingal O'Flaherty Wilde. The case ended, as has been already stated in these columns, in a verdict of "Not guilty."

In re-examination by Sir Edward Clarke, Wilde said it was from certain letters produced that he gathered that Lord Queensberry objected to his friendship with Lord Alfred Douglas. The letters were as follows: - "Carter's Hotel, Albemarle street, Sunday, April 1, 1984[sic]. Alfred, - It is extremely painful to me to have to write to you in this strain. I must, but please understand I decline to receive any answers from you in writing in return. Any letters coming under a disguised handwriting, or in other people's, if opened by mistake, will be put in the fire unread. After your previous hysterical impertinent ones I refuse to be annoyed with such, and must ask you if you have anything to say to come here and say it in person. Firstly, am I to understand that having left Oxford, as you did, with discredit to yourself, the reasons of which were fully explained to me by your tutor, you now intend to loaf and loll about and do nothing? All the time you were wasting at Oxford I was put off with the assurance that you were eventually to go into the Civil Service or to the Foreign Office, and then I was put off by an assurance of your going to the Bar. It appears to me you intend to do nothing; in fact the important valuable time has passed, and it seems you are too late now for any profession. I utterly decline to supply you, however, with sufficient funds just to enable you to loaf. You are preparing a wretched future for yourself, and it would be most cruel and wrong of me to encourage you in this. Do you seriously intend to make no attempt to help yourself, and to go on with your present life, doing nothing? Secondly, I come to the more painful part of this letter - your infamous intimacy with this man Wilde. It must either cease or I will disown you and stop all money supplies, and if necessary I will go to him personally and tell him so. Also, he shall have a bit of my mind. I am not going to try and analyse this intimacy, and I make no accusation, but to my mind to pose as a thing is as bad as the real thing... I hear on good authority, but this may be false, that his wife is petitioning to divorce him. Is this true, or do you know of it? If so, what is to be your position, going about as you do with him." The letter was signed, "Your disgusted so-called father, QUEENSBERRY."

To this Lord Alfred Douglas telegraphed to his father: "What a funny little man you are! -ALFRED DOUGLAS." Lord Queensberry's next letter to Lord Alfred was in these terms: - "You impertinent little jackanapes, I request you will not send me such messages through the telegraph, and if you come to me with any of your impertinence I will give you the thrashing you richly deserve. The only excuse for you is that you must be crazy. I heard from a man the other day who was at Oxford with you that that was your reputation there, which accounts for a good deal that has happened. All I can say is if I catch you with that man again I will make a public scandal in a way you little dream of. It is already a suppressed one. I prefer an open one, and, at any rate, I shall be no longer blamed for allowing such a state of things to go on. Unless this acquaintance ceases I shall carry out my threat and stop all supplies, and if you are not going to make any attempt to do something I shall certainly cut you down to a mere pittance, so you know what you are to expect. -QUEENSBERRY."

A third letter was written to Mr. A. Montgomery, the father of the Marchioness of Queensberry, who had obtained a divorce from the Marquis, in which, dating from Maidenhead, he said: - "Sir, - I have changed my mind, and, as I am not at all well, having been very much upset by what has happened the last ten days, I do not see why I should come dancing attendance upon you... Your daughter is the person who is supporting my son to defy me. She won't write, but she is now telegraphing on the subject to me. Last night, after hearing from you, I received a very quibbling, prevaricating sort of message from her, saying the boy denied having been at the Savoy for the last year, or with Oscar Wilde at all. As a matter of fact he did, and there has been a scandal. I am told they were warned off, but the proprietor would not admit this. This hideous scandal has been going on for years. Your daughter must be mad in the way she is behaving. She evidently wants to make out I want to make out a case against my son. It is nothing of the kind. I have made out a case against Oscar Wilde, and I have to his face accused him of it... It now lies in the hands of these two whether they will further defy me. Your daughter appears to me now to be encouraging them to do so, although she can hardly intend this. I don't believe Wilde will now dare defy me. He plainly showed the white feather the other day when I tackled him - a damned cur and coward of the Rosebery type. As for this so-called son of mine, I will have nothing to do with him. He may starve as far as I am concerned after his behaviour to me. His mother may support him, but she shan't do that here in London with this awful scandal going on. But your daughter's conduct is outrageous, and I am now fully convinced that the Rosebery-Gladstone-Royal insult that came to me through my other son, that she worked that, I thought it was you... It shall be known some day by all that Rosebery not only insulted me by lying to the Queen, which she knows, which makes her as bad as him and Gladstone, but also made a life-long quarrel between my son and I." Witness stated there was no truth whatever in the statement in Lord Queensberry's letter, that witness's wife was going to petition for a divorce. Mr. Carson, Q.C., read the following postcard, addressed by Lord A. Douglas to Lord Queensberry: - "As you return my letters unopened, I am obliged to write on a postcard. I write to inform you that I treat your absurd threats with absolute indifference. Ever since your exhibition at O.W.'s house I have made a point of appearing with him at many public restaurants, such as the Berkeley, Willis's Rooms, the Café Royal, etc., and I shall continue to go to any of these places whenever I choose and with whom I choose. I am of age, and my own master. You have disowned me at least a dozen times, and have very meanly deprived me of money. You have, therefore, no right over me, either legal or moral. If O.W. was to prosecute you in the Criminal Court for libel you would get seven years' penal servitude for your outrageous libels. Much as I detest you I am anxious to avoid this for the sake of the family; but if you try to assault me I shall defend myself with a loaded revolver, which I always carry; and if I shoot you, or if he shoots you, we should be completely justified, as we would be acting in self-defence against a violent and dangerous rough, and I think if you were dead not many people would miss you. -A.D."

After conferring briefly with his counsel, Sir Edward Clarke, at the Central Criminal Court on Friday morning, April 5, Mr. Oscar Wilde proceeded, in company with Lord A. Douglas and two other men, to the Holborn Viaduct Hotel. The party remained in conference in a private room until one o'clock, when they partook of luncheon. At a quarter past two the four men drove off in Mr. Wilde's brougham, which had been waiting outside the hotel for a considerable time. Their destination was a bank in St. James', where a large sum of money was drawn out. After the finding of the jury in the libel action the whole of the documents, with proofs of the evidence upon which the defence had intended to rely, were forwarded to the Public Prosecutor. Later in the day Mr. C.F. Gill, Mr. Angus Lewis, and Mr. Charles Russell waited upon Sir John Bridge at Bow-street and obtained a warrant for the arrest of Mr. Oscar Wilde, who was subsequently arrested by Inspector Richards at an hotel in Sloane-street. Mr. Wilde had with him two friends. The party at once drove to Scotland Yard to meet Inspector Brockwell, who had the warrant. The warrant was read to the prisoner, who made no reply; after some delay he was brought to Bow street. Mr. Wilde was the first to alight and walked straight into the station, followed by the detectives. He did not appear to be at all affected by the circumstances of his position. He was at once placed in the dock, and stood there with his hands in his pockets while the charge was taken down by Inspector Digby. When the charge had been entered Mr. Wilde was taken to the cells. Later Lord Alfred Douglas visited Bow-street in order to see whether he could bail out Mr. Wilde, and appeared much distressed when he was informed that on no consideration could his application be entertained. He then offered to procure extra comforts for the prisoner, but this also was not allowed by the officer on duty. At the same police court on Saturday, April 6th, Oscar Wilde, described as a gentleman, was placed in the dock, before Sir John Bridge, charged with offences under the 11th section of the Criminal Law Amendment Act. Mr. C.F. Gill, instructed by Mr. Angus Lewis, of the Treasury, prosecuted. At the commencement of the hearing the prisoner was defended by Mr. C.O. Humphreys, the solicitor who conducted the proceedings at the police court when the Marquis of Queensberry was prosecuted by Wilde for libel. At a later stage the prisoner was represented by Mr. Travers Humphreys. Mr. Gill said that the precise nature of the charges he should ask the magistrate to commit Wilde upon, would depend on the evidence disclosed on the depositions after the matter had been thoroughly inquired into. The case he proposed to proceed with in the first instance related to Wilde's conduct with regard to a young man named Charles Parker. Wilde would also be charged with conspiring with Alfred Taylor. Mr. Gill then explained the circumstances under which Parker was brought into contact with Wilde. Parker was a valet out of place. He had a brother named William Parker, who was a groom. At the end of February or the beginning of March the brothers went to the St. James' Restaurant. They were there approached by Taylor. He supplied them with drink, and got them to write down their names and addresses. He then gave his own address, and said that Oscar Wilde was a man who would give them money. After one or two interviews between Taylor and the lads, the prisoner Wilde being in communication with him by telegraph, they were invited to go to Kettner's Restaurant. They went, accompanied by Taylor. When they arrived they were shown into a private room, where dinner was laid for four. Soon afterwards the prisoner arrived, and the boys were entertained to a sumptuous repast provided by him. After dinner Wilde took Charles Parker to the Savoy Hotel, where he had a suite of rooms. He plied the lad with drink, and subsequently gave him £2. They met again on several other occasions. Wilde gave the youth money, a gold ring, and a silver cigarette case. There were, counsel added, a number of cases against the prisoner. Wilde had already had an opportunity of explaining these matters, and if he chose, he could get into the witness-box and give any explanation he liked. It was an unpleasant case, but it was one of enormous importance. It was of enormous importance to show that people who committed these offences were bound to be brought to justice. Charles Parker was the first witness. Whilst he was giving evidence, Alfred Taylor, alluded to by Mr. Gill in his opening statement, was placed in the dock and charged with conspiring with Oscar Wilde. Parker, in the course of his further evidence, said that on several occasions he visited Wilde at the Savoy Hotel and had champagne and chicken. Wilde gave him money to buy clothes with and made him other presents. The last time he saw Wilde the latter, who was in a cab in Trafalgar Square, told him he was looking as pretty as ever. William Parker, brother of the previous witness, gave corroborative evidence. Mrs. Ellen Grant, Little College-street, Westminster, proved that Taylor occupied rooms there, for which he paid £3 a month. Daylight was always excluded from the rooms. She understood that Taylor was a bachelor. She had heard him speak of "Oscar," but she had never seen Wilde. There were a number of visitors. Alfred Wood, formerly a clerk, spoke of his acquaintance with Wilde, and said he went to America to get rid of "these people" - that was, the people who went to Taylor's tea parties. Sidney Arthur Mavor and some other witnesses were then examined, and the case was adjourned till next day. Mr. Travers Humphreys applied for bail for Wilde on the ground that he knew the warrant was being applied for on Friday afternoon, but made no attempt to leave London. He had no intention of leaving the country, and he was the only person who could properly instruct solicitor and counsel. Sir John Bridge said it was not a case for bail, and the prisoners were removed in custody.

The Central News says: - "Lord Queensberry states that as soon as the trial ended on April 5th he sent this message to Mr. Wilde: - "If the country allows you to leave all the better for the country; but if you take my son with you I will follow you wherever you go and shoot you."

LONDON, April 5. - The career of Oscar Wilde ended to-day in blackest infamy. All London is saying to-night that it is a pity the miserable creature had not sufficient pluck to blow out his brains before the police seized him and put him behind bolts and bars to await the punishment for the crimes of which he is already proved guilty. Those who were his friends until his guilt was established by his own admissions under yesterday's merciless cross-examination urged him last night to take the shortest road to oblivion, which, they declared, was the only proper sequel to the exposure of his character.

The poor fool imagined it still possible to brazen it out, so he persuaded his lawyer, who refused to go on with the case, to bring the trial to a close by withdrawing the charges against Lord Queensberry. This was done, and then the fact was speedily brought home to Wilde that although nominally the prosecutor it was he and not the Marquis of Queensberry who was really on trial. Even the prompt verdict of the jury declaring explicitly that the infamous charge against him was true did not make the strange creature realize his position. He wrote a note to an evening newspaper declaring that he was unable to prove his innocence except by putting Lord Alfred Douglas in the witness box, and that he preferred to suffer shame rather than to allow the son to testify against his father. This was simply imbecile because nothing has been adduced in the trial about the relations between Wilde and Lord Alfred.

There is reason to believe that the disgraced man was prepared to flee from the country. But English law for once acted with commandable promptness. Red tape was cut. The public prosecutor applied for a warrant within two hours after the dramatic collapse of the case in court, and tonight the man who a few days ago was a pampered exquisite, lies on a plank bed in an eight by four cell in the Bow street police station. The charge against him, for some reason not explained, is not felony, but misdemeanor, and the maximum penalty is two years at hard labour, but the Grand Jury may change the indictment to a more serious offence. He must remain in jail until the trial takes place in May, for the magistrate is certain to refuse to accept bail.

The cynical and supercilious bravado which Wilde manifested during the trial changed when he found himself in custody. He listened in silence to the reading of the warrant. He had been aware for an hour or two that escape was impossible, for detectives had been closely following him. He refused to say a word to the officers or to others. He asked at the police station for a special cell and that his valet be allowed to bring him his portmanteau. The police currently refused all requests, and locked him up like an ordinary prisoner.

It is impossible to describe the sensation which the case has created in London. The Cleveland street scandals of a few years ago were bad enough, but the public interest then was mild compared to the talk created by this case. It has been the only subject discussed wherever men have congregated for the last few days. It must be said that public opinion is almost unanimous in thanking the Marquis of Queensberry, in spite of his many eccentricities, for bringing to a crisis what has long been a rapidly spreading scandal in the metropolis. The effect of the exposure and of the exemplary punishment which is sure to follow in Wilde's case will be far reaching. It comes none too soon. The growth of this evil among certain classes of this country is appalling. The police and others are prepared to make fearful revelations as soon as it becomes evident that no other means will suffice to check and destroy the vice which undermined the civilization of the ancient Romans. Those who possess accurate knowledge believe that this point has now been reached. Publicity is a dreadful price to pay for overcoming such an evil, but the investigation in the Wilde case alone has convinced those engaged in it that the situation demands desperate remedies. Mr. Carson, whose wonderful management of the case against Wilde excited the admiration of the members of the bar, detailed to newspaper men, after the verdict had been rendered to-day, some of his appalling discoveries. He did this, he said, as a public duty, not that revolting details should be published - that, indeed, he forbade - but that public attention should be called to the unsuspected but monstrous danger undermining English society.

London newspapers have printed far more about the matter than has been telegraphed to the American press. Great morning dailies like the Times and Telegraph have given their readers 6,000 to 12,000 words daily of the court proceedings. The St. James’s Gazette achieved distinction yesterday by placarding London with the announcement that it was the only paper printing no report of the evidence in the Wilde-Queensberry trial. A lively controversy has begun over the duty of the press in the matter.

Many seats which had been purchased at the Haymarket and St. James's theatres, where Wilde’s plays "An Ideal Husband" and "The Importance of Being Earnest" are running, were empty tonight. The audiences were small, and there was a smaller proportion of ladies than usual, but no demonstration of any kind.

By United Press.

LONDON, April 5. - The case of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel was brought to a close this morning in a verdict in favor of the defendant. The jury found not only that the defendant was not guilty of libel, but that the Marquis of Queensberry's charges were true in substance and in fact, and that they had been made for the public good. Wilde was not present when the verdict was rendered. He had been in a room adjoining the courtroom, where he had consulted with his solicitor. When the verdict was announced Wilde and a companion drove from the Old Bailey to the Holborn Hotel, where they were joined soon afterward by Lord Alfred Douglas and a companion. The four took luncheon together in a private room, Wilde’s carriage remaining in front of the hotel.

After leaving the Holborn Hotel Wilde went to the Westminster Bank, where he drew out the funds to his account. He was constantly shadowed. He returned to the hotel accompanied by Lord Alfred Douglas only. Remaining a few minutes, they drove to Ely place and thence to the Cadogan hotel, where they seem to have eluded the detectives, as the Scotland Yard authorities began issuing descriptions of Wilde and spreading them over the city.

In the meantime Mr. Lewis, solicitor for the Treasury, had applied at the Bow Street Police Court for a warrant for Wilde’s immediate arrest. The warrant was placed in the hands of Scotland Yard detectives, who found Wilde at the Cadogan Hotel, where he had for a time eluded the men who were shadowing him. He was arrested and taken to Scotland Yard. Afterward he was transferred to the Bow street station and locked up in a cell.

Before Wilde was taken to his cell the charge, indicated by his testimony in court, was read to him. He stood with his hands in his pockets, silent and apparently unconcerned.

The Old Bailey court room was crowded almost to suffocation this morning when Mr. Carson resumed his speech on behalf of the Marquis of Queensberry. It would be his painful duty, he said, to put up on the witness stand men who would speak freely of the nature of their relations with the plaintiff, Wilde. The ages of these men varied from 18 to 23 years period they were of the class of servants, valets, &., not belonging to Mr. Wilde’s station in life, not interested in literature or art, yet they addressed this distinguished dramatist by his Christian name, Oscar, he in turn calling them Charley, Freddy, &. Mr. Carson said he would produce overwhelming evidence of the abominable immorality of this man Wilde.

Sir Edward Clarke interrupted Mr. Carson and said he had undertaken a great responsibility in defending Wilde against the charges made against him by the Marquis of Queensberry. In regard to the literature which Wilde had published and upon which Mr. Carson had questioned him, he (Sir Edward) had come to the painful conclusion that it could not be expected that the jury would find a verdict of guilty on the actual words used by the defendant, viz., that Wilde was posing as a devotee of unnatural practices. He had consulted with Wilde in the interim of the adjournment of the court, and, in order to save the court the painful details connected with the rest of the case, he was prepared to accept the verdict of the jury in regard to Wilde's literature.

The Judge interposed and said if the jury were justified in agreeing upon a verdict on one part of the case they must return a verdict of guilty or not guilty as regards the entire case.

The jury then rendered the verdict, to which Sir Edward Clarke assented, in accordance with the direction of the Court. When the verdict was rendered the Marquis of Queensberry left the dock amid loud cheers. The Judge granted an order requiring Wilde to pay the costs of the defence.

The reports previously cabled in regard to Mr. Beerbohm Tree's connection with the case were inaccurate. Mr. Carson explained to the Court last evening that Mr. Tree received a copy of a letter written by Wilde to Lord Alfred Douglas, and thereupon sent for Wilde and handed him the copy. Mr. Carson said that Mr. Tree had cabled this information to him, and that it tallied perfectly with the account given by Wilde in the witness box. Mr. Carson added that he thought Mr. Tree had acted perfectly right in the matter.

The Judge said there was not the smallest ground for any suggestion adverse to Mr. Tree, who had acted with perfect propriety.

Sir Edward Clarke agreed with Mr. Carson and the Judge that Mr. Tree could not properly have done otherwise than he did.

In an interview this afternoon the Marquis of Queensberry said to a representative of the United Press:

"I have sent this message to Wilde: ‘If the country allows you to leave, all the better for the country; but if you take my son with you I will follow you wherever you go and shoot you.'"

Sworn informations have been lodged against several persons mentioned in the trial, some of whose names were not made public, and the civil officers are only awaiting the authority of the Treasury Department to make arrests.

The Marquis of Queensberry’s solicitors have sent to the Public Prosecutor a copy of the statements of all the witnesses which the defence intended to call to the stand, together with a full shorthand report of the trial as far as it had gone.

This afternoon a United Press reporter visited the Haymarket and St. James's theatres, where Oscar Wilde's plays are running. Mr. Morell, one of the managers of the Haymarket, in reply to a question as to how the result of the case would affect future business, said he would rather not express an opinion. He would say, however, that Mr. Wilde's name had been taken out of the bills and advertisements of "An Ideal Husband," and from this the public could form its own conclusions.

Mr. George Alexander, manager of the St. James's Theatre, where Oscar Wilde's play, "The Importance of Being Earnest," is running, said:

"When the scandal was first rumored business here was slightly affected, but it is now normal. Mr. Wilde's name has been withdrawn from the bills and the advertisements of his comedy, which is the most innocent play in the world. It does not contain a line that could hurt the most tender susceptibilities. Whether the trial will cause a change in the business in the future remains to be seen."

Mr. Alexander said also that "The Importance of Being Earnest," would be kept on the stage, pending the public verdict. If he should be compelled to withdraw it, some 150 persons would be thrown out of work, as he had nothing ready to replace it.

It is reported that the Criterion, to which "An Ideal Husband" was to be transferred from the Haymarket, has declined to put the play on its stage.

The audiences at the Haymarket and St. James’s theatres, where Mr. Wilde’s plays are running, were rather small this evening. But they made no hostile demonstration. At St. James’s there were few persons accepting those who had bought their tickets in advance. The gallery was somewhat critical, and two or three audible comments confused the players slightly.

The Evening News has received the following letter from Oscar Wilde, written upon the notepaper of the Holborn Viaduct Hotel:

"It would have been impossible for me to have proved my case without putting Lord Alfred Douglas in the witness box against his father. He was extremely anxious to go into the witness box, but I would not let him. Rather than put him in so painful a position I determined to withdraw from the case, and bear upon my own shoulders whatever ignominy and shame might result from my prosecution of the Marquis of Queensberry. "Oscar Wilde."

The Daily Chronicle will have a long leader to-morrow on the Oscar Wilde case. It will say:

"Either Mr. Carson's brief contained a series of the wickedest slanders or the prosecutor perjured himself unspeakably."

The Daily Telegraph will say tomorrow in a leader on Wilde’s case:

"It was a just verdict and must be held to include with Wilde the tendency of his peculiar careeer, the meaning and the influence of his teachings, and all the shallow and specious arts by which he attempted to establish cult and even set up new schools of literature and social thought."